Screencast

I agree that some improvements could be made. I also really like the podcast the way it is and what is mainly seems to be missing is a third seat to be filled. With the third personality the chances of someone seeing another movie, having another question to ask, or at the very least giving one of the other two a break. Maybe that means a new editor, maybe that means tricking more of the WM staff (who I know are crazy busy) into joining. Just my thoughts.

Whatever happened to that open call Rorie gave for new freelancers?

@RockinKemosabe: What's that have to do with this thread? lol Not sure though, last I heard he was dwindling down the results. Ask him on the new Rambling Rorie?

Rorie should see if he can wrangle Whitta in for a podcast.

Rorie should complain less about macs, talk about his weekends less and ramble less. Also come prepared or something, I know it's a weird idea but it might help make the podcast flow and not feel disjointed.

@Milkman: Yeah I don't pretend to have much of a clue on what their hiring practices are. Seems difficult to find someone who will fit into the level of professional lunacy that goes on there. Especially when you think about how many take movies and TV way too seriously.

@FinalDasa: There were just mentions in the OP's post that Rorie's doing a lot of heavy lifting for the site and I was just curious if there was any mention of what was going on with the submissions.

2-person podcasts (especially a 2-person long-distance podcast) tend to lose interest after so many minutes. I try to listen to the end out of my respect for Alex and Matt, but half the time I end up bored by the 30-minute mark, especially if it's a slow week.

Sometimes it would be nice if they made more time for television, but I understand they do not have the time. I guess that would be a overall site thing too, because I know a lot of television isn't that good, but a lot of films aren't good either. I'd rather listen to people talk about Boardwalk Empire, Community or even something dumb but fun like Castle than Jack and Jill or the new Alvin and the Chipmunks movie. I get it -- film > television -- but I get bored since they're wasting their time talking about how bad a film is when we already knew it was going to be bad. I understand they're a legitimate site and that involves reviewing everything, but I don't care what Alex or Matt thinks about Yogi Bear.

If they hire someone new eventually, that person should be the "TV guy/girl". I dunno, something different that someone can bring to the table instead of a third person talking about the same stuff as the first two.

Also, Matt needs to sleep better, because he his low energy sometimes makes me not want to stick around. He's gotten better, though, but some months back he seemed bothered by the fact that he had to do a podcast every Monday.

I just think you shouldn't go into much detail of the whole "rorie talking about why he shouldnt do the podcast", who cares if he says that

@Winston said:

I just think you shouldn't go into much detail of the whole "rorie talking about why he shouldnt do the podcast", who cares if he says that

Agreed, I love the whole transparency of Whiskey media, I'd rather he'd be honest and tell us about broken Macs and whatnot. I agree with you that Rorie is the hardest working man at Whiskey, keeping a website single-handedly afloat is no no easy task but he managed to do it. Now he has the responsibility of all the video content which must be a time consuming process. I think the key is getting a 3rd guy and giving Rorie a week off.

@mylifeforAiur said:

Rorie should see if he can wrangle Whitta in for a podcast.

This has been my thought my ages. Or at least get Ryan on more often.

@Milkman said:

But if there's one thing I hate during podcasts, it's to hear the people recording them talk about how they want to get it over with.

I stopped listening for a while in the early days because I got sick of hearing Rorie moan about how tired he was but he seems to have gotten peppier since then.

Also spoilers...just stop talking about a movie if you want to talk spoilers. Even if the two think it is ok to talk about, it isn't.

@mylifeforAiur said:

Rorie should see if he can wrangle Whitta in for a podcast.

I think he was on the podcast for last year's Oscars, but I would love to have him more often.

@Dany said:

Also spoilers...just stop talking about a movie if you want to talk spoilers. Even if the two think it is ok to talk about, it isn't.

or skip ahead. or turn it off.

@Toms115 said:

@Dany said:

Also spoilers...just stop talking about a movie if you want to talk spoilers. Even if the two think it is ok to talk about, it isn't.

or skip ahead. or turn it off.

Or don't talk spoilers about a movie that isn't out. Or talk around it, not every discussion on a movie or tv show has to hinge on a spoiler. It does a real disservice to those who want to listen to them talk about a movie when its wrapped around 'spoiler time'

@Dany said:

Also spoilers...just stop talking about a movie if you want to talk spoilers. Even if the two think it is ok to talk about, it isn't.

or just skip ahead/turn it off or man up and deal with it

ITS A PODCAST ABOUT MOVIES how can you talk about movies without spoilers?

I wouldn't mind a 3 man booth since those generally work well and most of the the 2/1 man podcasts I listenen to have callers call in

@Dany: its their job to discuss movies recent or otherwise being hampered because omg spoilers is a unnecessary precaution when 9 times out of 10 they say hey spoilers or do a good enough job of beating around the bush.